Sheryl Gay Stolberg and Jim Rutenberg wrote in the New York Times: "Mr. Bush, sounding alternately testy and conciliatory at a White House news conference, said he was 'obviously disappointed.' He portrayed the results as a cumulative 'thumping' of Republicans and conceded that as head of the party, he bore some responsibility. . . .
I saw that press conference. Yes, ‘testy’ is the word.
After Bush conceded, ‘We got thumped,’ a reporter quoted his words back at him to be sure she had them correct. He stopped her and said, ‘It was a “cumulative thumping.” Race-by-race, the differences were minimal.’
Once again, Bush's and my recollections of events differ:
The results were all over the place. There were strongly Red states. There were strongly Blue states. One race I recall [though I can’t remember which] was 71%—29% Democrat. Missouri’s was a minimal race—as was Tennessee. What is amazing is the fact that Missouri has a Democratic senator at all. I’ve lived here most of my life and I don’t recall the last time we had one of those.
So, Bush said the races were close—immediately after saying he and his party had received a ‘thumping.’
Pundits on the right are quick to point out the difference between conservatives and Republicans these days. They have also lined up to say that the races were tight. The majorities were miniscule. Etc.
What only one person has seen fit to mention is that very redrawing-of-the-map that occurred during the GOP watch—despite the best efforts of the Democrats to thwart it.
If you take that injustice into account, the majorities start to look even bigger, don’t they?